A History of the Durham Miner's Association 1870-1904

by John Wilson

1875

The third Reduction—Co-operative Colliery—The demand for better Houses—The fourth Reduction

Early in the year the Association was called upon to face another reduction in wages. The Executive Committee had sent some requests with respect to hewers putting in the foreshifts and working hard places. The owners sent a reply on January 15th refusing the requests, and at the same time saying, such things being asked of them in depressed times were offensive, and would not have to be repeated. In the same letter Mr Crawford was told that the employers had that day "unanimously decided to ask for a reduction in the wages of all men employed about coal mines and that the Standing (Joint) Committee be instructed to discuss the matter of such reductions and the date when it should commence."

To this the Executive Committee replied that they would pass over the question of reduction as it was premature to interfere with it, but they complained of the tone of the letter sent to them, which was very unbecoming, to say the least. They had a perfect right to send the requests. No doubt they were annoying. "But however annoying a request properly made may be, it ought, in keeping with the common courtesies of life, to be denied without imperiousness. It was annoying to them as workmen to receive an application for a reduction."

The response to that reached Mr Crawford on the 30th. It informed him that they (the owners) felt it needful to claim such reduction as will leave the wages of both underground and surface men ten per cent. in excess of 1871, to take effect from the pay ending 13th March. Mr Bunning added: "As it is our usual custom not to carry out a resolution of this nature without first having a consultation with you, I am requested to ask you to make such arrangements with your clients as may enable you to meet our Committee at an early date to decide."

A special Council meeting was called for the 6th of February to consider whether a deputation should meet the employers; if so, how many and whom they should be. The Council decided that as a deputation the members of the Joint Committee should meet the employers, and Mr Crawford was deputed to go to South Wales to inquire into the condition of things amongst the miners there.

At an adjourned Council held on February 10th it was again considered, and the following resolution carried:—

In looking at the last reduction, and the undue advantage the coal owners have taken on us in making a call on the bankmen so soon after the arbitration case, that we in future entertain no more reductions on one separate class of workmen, without knowing their intentions as to the rest of the workmen in our Association.

The meeting with the employers took place on 16th February, when six reasons were given by them why the reduction was needed: Many collieries were working at ruinous losses; a terribly increased cost of production; at many collieries the men were restricting their work; a greatly increased number of men were needed; the increased cost owing to the great decrease in the working hours; and the fact that Mr Gurney's award was delayed two months.

The employers again issued notices, but not to all men or all collieries. The Committee immediately called a Council, and drew the attention of the lodges to two resolutions which were passed on April 21st and December 5th, 1874.

That in future when there are notices given for a reduction of wages throughout the county, and where a colliery or collieries of men do not get their notices, they be requested to give them in.

Where men who are members of our Association and who have not received notice should these refuse to give in their notices, their names be struck from our books and never again re-entered.

In addition to this the Committee issued a circular in which they reviewed the condition of trade, and pointed out that in many districts life and death struggles were taking place. These men were being supported by voluntary contributions from other mining districts and the public. If Durham came out large support would be cut off, and the state here rendered more dangerous. In Northumberland and Cleveland arbitrations were proceeding. There was only two weeks' money in the funds, therefore the best policy was to accept arbitration. Facing these circumstances they advised the acceptance of arbitration. The employers would be compelled to show sufficient reasons for a reduction. If this were not done no umpire would reduce the wages. This advice was accepted at the Council on 8th March, and it was resolved to refer the whole matter to arbitration on the prices and wages ruling at hearing of the last case, that Mr L. Jones and W. Crawford be arbitrators, and the preparing and conducting of the case be left to the Executive Committee. On March 10th they met the employers, and made arrangements for the proceedings and the withdrawal of the notices, and they informed the members that in every case where the workmen had given notices they must at once be withdrawn.

The first meeting on the arbitration case was held on April 15th in the Queen's Head Hotel, Newcastle. The Right Hon. W. E. Forster, M.P., was the umpire. The arbitrators for the employers were Mr W. Armstrong and Mr D. Dale; for the workmen Mr L. Jones and Mr W. Crawford. The case was a dual one, a combination of the Miners' and Cokemen's Associations. The latter agreed to accept the statement made by the employers in the miners' case and then put in a separate reply. The following was the order of the procedure:—The employers stated their case. Then the miners replied on the first day. Second day, the owners' reply to the miners, the miners' rejoinder; the cokemen's reply to the employers, then their reply to the cokemen. The third day's sitting was taken up by the cokemen's rejoinder. The same arbitrators acted in both cases, but Mr Jackson Wilson presented the cokemen's case. The umpire gave his award on the 23rd of April—the reduction being five per cent. from the underground wages and four per cent. from those of the surface men.

At the Council meeting held on May 4th a resolution was carried urging upon the Miners' National Association to use their influence to have established an important Board of Arbitration, such Board to say: "First, what amount of interest ought to be claimed for capital invested in coal-mining operations; secondly, whether or not the books showing the profit and loss accounts of the employers ought to be laid before the Arbitrators in deciding a matter in dispute as to the rise or fall of the wages of their workmen; and thirdly, what portion of the profits ought to go to the capitalist and what portion to the labourer."

The programme for a Council meeting held on 21st August 1875 contained a resolution dealing with the providing of a better class of houses.

"That we appeal to the owners to have better houses right throughout the county for the members of the Durham Miners' Association, and not to make such difference between brakesmen and members of the Association. We believe that one man has the same right to a good house as another."

In the balance sheet for the first quarter of the year is found an item relating to the Coop Colliery—3100 shares in the Coop Mining Company, £15,500. For some time, and especially during 1874, the idea of a co-operative mine had been agitating the two northern counties. Meetings were held in various parts, addressed chiefly by gentlemen from Northumberland. The idea fell upon good ground in Durham, for from time to time it was found on the Council programme, and, so far as the Association is concerned, bore fruit in the shares mentioned. The fruit was not merely collective, but on every hand those who could took out shares, even to the extent of all their savings. The Committee of management were:

Dr J. H. Rutherford, Chairman.	Mr W. Crawford.
Mr T. Burt, M.P.	Mr J. Forman.
Mr J. Nixon.	Mr W. H. Patterson.
Mr R. Young.	Mr J. Byson.
Mr J. Brown.	Mr G. Fryer.
Mr R. Cramon.	E. Lowther, Secretary.

—all good men, and, if it could have been established, would have been. They were all tried co-operators and ardent believers in productive co-operation. But the enterprise was doomed from the first. The name of the colliery was Monkwood, near Chesterfield, Derbyshire.

On the 25th of September 1875 the Committee submitted a balance sheet for the year ending 30th June. The auditors were Benson, Eland & Co. They informed the members that after depreciation as per rule the net loss up to date was £10,863, 15s. 8d. The Committee in presenting the balance sheet said it had arisen from circumstances over which they had no control. The output of the colliery had never reached to their anticipations. The cost of production, and the unsatisfactory state in which the Society found the colliery, had occasioned the loss. The vendor had not truthfully represented the output. They had filed a Bill in Chancery against him for the recision of the contract and the return of the purchase money. The loss to Durham was £15,500.

On 6th November the ex-Committee was called upon to face the fourth reduction. They received a letter on that date from the employers conveying to them a demand for twenty per cent. reduction from all underground earnings, including banksmen, and twelve and a half per cent. off all above-ground labour, to take effect from the 27th. The Committee replied protesting against the imperative way in which the demand was made, and resolved to ask the county whether a deputation should attend Newcastle to hear the reasons assigned for the reduction. The county agreed to send a deputation and offer open arbitration, the deputation being the Joint Committee, and that a Council meeting be held on the 27th to hear the report. The Committee met the owners on Monday, the 22nd, and the offer of open arbitration was accepted, the Court to consist of four arbitrators and an umpire.